September 22, 2008

Momma Shannon

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
3,741
Points
0
Location
USA
Good morning everyone. I'm gonna see what's up in the world of MJ. BRB with some news and/or mentionings :yes:

Ok, this is what I've found for this early in the morning...

Jackson tribute, world music highlight Hideout Block Party
By Mark Guarino Special to the Tribune | Special to the Chicago Tribune September 22, 2008 Chicago's evolution from a swamp has resonance in a music festival that each year evolves from a garbage truck depository. In this city, beauty can be cultivated from unlikely places, and the 12th annual Hideout Block Party may just be the unlikeliest.

The Hideout's charm is presenting music against the backdrop of a grade school pageant, an aesthetic that's supersized when club organizers move the programming out the front door and onto the neighboring grounds of the city's fleet-management complex. In a crowded music season when sleek, corporate festivals tend to resemble one another, the homespun spirit of this weekend festival makes it the most eclectic and enjoyable.

Saturday's bill was stacked with world music, the most exciting entry being the Plastic People of the Universe, a seven-member ensemble from the Czech Republic that, at the start of its 40 years together, battled Soviet rule to emerge as heroes of free expression. (The ensemble's struggle is central to "Rock 'n' Roll," the Tom Stoppard play that will arrive at the Goodman next year.) The group played a compelling hybrid of punk and jazz, trading vocals among its members and switching from big rock riffs to spacey interludes, driven by the psychedelic counterpoints of saxophone and violin. When Vancouver's Black Mountain followed with a similar approach, it backtracked into hippie clichés.

Monotonix, an Israeli trio known for gonzo theatrics, lived up to its reputation when, in the midst of garage-rock chaos, singer Ami Shalev took to the crowd while half-naked inside a garbage can; it was a sweaty, obnoxious hit. More subdued was the charismatic Malian guitarist Vieux Farka Toure, whose bluesy guitar leads flickered against a two-beat dance rhythm.

Neko Case, a Canadian whose musical life took off when she lived in Chicago, returned to headline. New songs from an album-in-progress didn't stray far from her signature sound that evoked open skies, desert horizons and post-midnight laments. Unlike her role in the New Pornographers, the Canadian band that closed Sunday, Case's solo work begins and ends with her honeyed and giant vocals, immediately summoning both the yearning and sorrow of country gospel.

Yet the day's highlight was uniquely Chicagoan. Singer-songwriter Robbie Fulks hosted "Goin' Back to Indiana," a quasi-variety set honoring Michael Jackson's 50th birthday year. Fulks, Chicago's most fertile musical mind, presented songs from a lost album he recorded but never released of Jackson covers starting from the Jackson 5 days to a rootsy transformation of "Billie Jean."

Guest vocalists, puppets and Day-Glo jumpsuits were topped by South Side rapper Rhymefest, who led the "Thriller" dance, with bar staff as zombies. Downsized, the King of Pop became just one of the regulars on Wabansia Avenue.

ctc-tempo@tribune.com


Ghostland Observatory (Saturday on the Zarabanda Stage): Put simply, it was otherworldly. A typhoon of smoke and teal laser beams had engulfed the eastern end of J Street, where it looked as though a spaceship had docked on top of the Zarabanda Stage. Fueled by squealing vocals, bouncy keyboards, hypnotic drumbeats and wash-and-go guitar riffs, it was none other than the intergalactic limousine of disco-electro-funk-glam rockers, Ghostland Observatory. In the distance, beyond the caped circus antics of singer Aaron Behrens and drummer/synthesizer master Thomas Ross Turner, one could almost hear the cries of Axel Rose, the Bee Gees, Meatloaf, Michael Jackson, Prince, Electric Light Orchestra, Earth, Wind & Fire and Daft Punk, all of whom were being held at ray gunpoint inside. How else could anyone explain such a hypnotic, mutant sound? – DERRIK CHINN http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/features/20080922-9999-1c22bands.html


Dancing Prisoners: Why it isn’t funny anymore

By Carlo Osi | 09/22/2008 10:44 AM
PHILADELPHIA – The Dancing Prisoners, if you will recall, was the Internet sensation in 2007 when prisoners from Cebu danced their way to international stardom by moving to the groove of Michael Jackson’s “Thriller”. Convicted rapists, drug pushers, murderers and what-have-you banded together to create a funny work of art. Ingenious and novel, the Dancing Prisoners caught the world’s attention.

After Thriller,
they moved to other easily identifiable tunes such as that of Soul Ja Boy and Bonnie Tyler’s 80s hit “I Need a Hero”. In the months that followed, more songs were danced to, flooding its home base YouTube with innumerable shots of orange-clad criminals dancing almost in sync. The very latest one was Macarena by the band Los Del Rio, a song celebrating its 15th year (with Los Del Rio endorsing in Spanish the use by the prisoners of their newly-remixed version).

For whatever reason, it seems like the Cebu Provincial Detention and Rehabilitation Center where these prisoners are dancing have made it an institutional policy to come up with a video every month. Someone has got to tell them the idea is already stale, the videos are not funny anymore, and the erstwhile phenomenon has turned into a bad joke instead of an entertaining one.

Embarrassing, really

A few months ago, Anderson Cooper of CNN broadcast a Dancing Prisoners episode as found on YouTube. The entire CNN segment took perhaps 4 to 5 minutes of the show. Now let’s get to the point: the first video featuring “Thriller” was funny and exhilarating. The next few may still have its magic touch. But the more recent videos looked very scripted, forced, and embarrassing.

Admittedly, the Dancing Prisoners’ “Thriller” YouTube video last year was extremely unique and successful – notching up 14 million hits – a large number especially for a video-inspired, reality TV-based world. Where on earth but the Philippines can you see prisoners dancing to the 1983 monster hit of Michael Jackson. Easy to embrace happiness, Filipinos had fun the world over.

But like a boxer who doesn’t know when to properly hang his gloves or an 80-year old company CEO who doesn’t want to retire, the Cebu detention center and its officers don’t seem to know when enough of the dancing videos is enough.

Maybe it hasn’t crossed their minds what other nations and other peoples think of these Dancing Prisoners or of the Philippines in particular. Not that the prisoners and these videos are re-writing our history, but it’s not in our best interest to be known as the Land of the Dancing Prisoners. If there are also too many videos of the same prisoners dancing, the novelty is lost, boredom sets in, and any message is expunged.

Prisoner’s dilemma

In the context of the Dancing Prisoners, they themselves have their own Prisoner’s Dilemma.

When you look at the 20 or so main dancers, you will see a lot of happy faces who are just so willing to dance to the current vibe. But from the outlying areas, it appears that there are hundreds more who are just merely swaying and doing very simple dance moves and which the cameras very seldom train on. What’s on their minds?

An interview by the Associated Press in August 2007 reveals that for some prisoners, the dancing exercise is a relief from the daily rigors of the imprisoned life. It gives them something to do, compels them to exercise, allows them to freely socialize, and minimizes violence among fellow inmates.

Some say it serves as a good rehabilitation for them peculiarly because they are in a detention and rehabilitation facility. For others, being famous is a good thing. Certainly they realize that they are still in prison, either serving a few years or awaiting trial for murder charges, drug offenses and similar crimes. As criminal trials in the Philippines take a very long time to conclude (e.g. change of lawyers mid-way, delay in prosecution, or serial postponements of trial dates by judges), some say it’s a relief.

But the uniqueness of the phenomenon is waning and fast wearing out. It may be overextending the innovative nature of the first few videos. Other nations may be confused as to what we do to our prisoners. Is dancing a reward, a punishment, a coerced act, or a treat? The issue of human rights can also be called into play.

Moreover, isn’t the Cebu detention center profiting from all of these dance routines? Sure, the prisoners may be getting a small part of the business income from these dances, but the detention center allegedly gets the bigger share. It may in the long run discourage the national government from increasing the budget allocated for improvement of prison conditions because they can just get their prisoners to dance and solicit fees in the process.

The prisoners can’t complain: they would likely fear reprisals particularly because the venture has morphed from a simple exercise routine into an income-generating scheme. The prison officials would want them to dance as frequently as possible allegedly because the sympathetic “returns” are great. It might not be far-fetched that there would be nighttime performances for eager Cebu tourists who will pay to see former street gladiators and thugs strut their stuff.

National image

It’s common knowledge that 10% of Filipinos lives outside the archipelago. It’s good to know that those who live in or have migrated to the United States are highly educated individuals such as nurses, doctors, engineers, and accountants. Hence, if office workers, colleagues, church friends or classmates joke about this, Filipinos in the U.S. can laugh it off and dismiss it as orchestrated by a bored prison consultant and choreographed by a very creative prisoner.

Come to think of it, I deeply wonder what my colleagues at the Philadelphia law firm I work for think about this whole Dancing Prisoners phenomenon. Internet-savvy as they are, I’m pretty quite sure they have encountered this. I haven’t been formally asked about it, but I would certainly use the excuse stated above if grilled on it.

But explaining away the Dancing Prisoners is harder than many people may think. It might be hard to explain it to inquisitive bosses. If a person in the U.S. is applying for a job, the human resources department typically searches Internet sources such as blogs, Facebook, MySpace and others for information and compromising pictures or ideas that may adversely affect chances of employment. If a Filipino OFW is applying for work, the Dancing Prisoners videos may be a topic of conversation during the interview.

This is not to say that a nurse or a doctor wanting to work in the U.S. will be quizzed by the interviewers about these videos. Neither will it necessarily lead to a rejection letter and thus lose potential employment. To think that way is overstretching this argument. But the fact that the Dancing Prisoners videos are there on YouTube and that it’s alleged to already be a monthly commercial venture is something to think about.

In fact, it’s hard to explain it even among professionals and graduate students whether in the Philippines or outside. Fil-American school kids might be teased about it. Other nationalities may think jail officials are abusing Filipino prisoners simply because they have “lesser rights” or can effortlessly be compelled to do things they will not do on their own. It’s hard to imagine something like this occurring in the U.S. with its strong advocacy for prisoners’ rights.

Famous for the wrong reason

One of the more recent videos was the 80s hit song “I Need a Hero” with the inmates holding portraits of heroic icons such as the Gandhi, Dalai Lama, and Pope John Paul II. It was meant to be a tribute to all of the individuals who have served as heroes for various peoples. Don’t get me wrong but I think there’s just something cheesy and awkward about this.

Certainly it made them famous, but there’s no reason making the Philippines famous for Dancing Prisoners. Given the country’s intellectual, human and physical resources, it can do better than that. It’s humorous for a time but the country also risks misinterpretation.

While other Southeast Asian nations such as Vietnam, Malaysia and Thailand are consistently promoting themselves as superior tourist attractions and great investment opportunities, and with China and Japan remaining to be the leaders in the Asian region, the Philippines is again, reputation-wise, being left behind.

The fact that it’s embarrassing can be phrased this way: Will the Cebu provincial government organize its capitol staff members to dance in a coordinated way and show it through YouTube? Or will Cebu mayors and other politicians take the time to dance like the prisoners and similarly use YouTube as a broadcast platform? The answer is simply No. They won’t do it because it’s humiliating and likely to create a negative image.

Sooner or later, the world might conveniently forget that the Philippines was the originator of the bloodless and peaceful people-powered revolution in 1986 which overthrew an overstaying dictator and just remember our economically struggling country as the Home of the Dancing Prisoners. What a real shame if and when that happens.

The author is a US/Japan-trained and educated Filipino lawyer. Send comments to carlo.osi@gmail.com or through http://eastofturtleisland.blogspot.com/.
as of 09/22/2008 11:16 AM



Today in
Michael Jackson History
1995 - Michael Jackson was inducted into the Black Entertainment's Television Walk of Fame. Jackson also performed "You Are Not Alone" with the Union Temple Baptist Choir.

2004 - The Federal Communications Commission voted to fine CBS a record $550,000 for indecency related to the Super Bowl in which Janet Jackson's right breast was exposed. The FCC fined each of the 20 CBS-owned television stations the maximum penalty of $27,500.



[SIZE=+2]Michael Jackson Quote​
[/SIZE]

Get me out
Into the night-time
Four walls won't hold me tonight
If this town
Is just an apple
Then let me take a bite
- Michael Jackson, Human Nature​
Ok, don't see much more as of yet.
 
Last edited:
Thanks.

That performance of YANA is that one available? on YT I mean?
 
Thanks for this, Shannon.

Yet the day's highlight was uniquely Chicagoan. Singer-songwriter Robbie Fulks hosted "Goin' Back to Indiana," a quasi-variety set honoring Michael Jackson's 50th birthday year. Fulks, Chicago's most fertile musical mind, presented songs from a lost album he recorded but never released of Jackson covers starting from the Jackson 5 days to a rootsy transformation of "Billie Jean."

That is really cool. I am glad that was the highlight of the event.

The article about the Prisoners dancing "Thriller" was interesting.
 
September 22, 2008
Photos: Zombie Dance at The Hideout

This weekend's Hideout Block Party had quite a few arresting images -- Monotonix anyone? -- but the unholy meeting of Michael Jackson songs, Robbie Fulks, Rhymefest, and a whole mess o' zombies threatens to be one of the weirdest and most enduring mixture of sound and images of the whole weekend. The choreographed dancing to "Thriller" was pretty durn impressive, and the make-up and costuming was absolutely terrific. Where DO they come up with these ideas? We'll have a full photo set spanning the weekend up here soon, but for now, bring on the zombies!

http://chicagoist.com/2008/09/22/photos_zombie_dance_at_the_hideout.php

20080921_hideout%20228-1.jpg


Hideout Block Party 092108


 
Looking for a quick update ...

There's an article about Michael taking the kids to Gary but they are really slow posting that it's from Sept. 8th :lol:

Lets see what else we can find...

The Stock Market And The Bailout For Kids



offthewall.jpg

WE ARE WAY OFF THE WALL NOW PEOPLE Michael Jackson's Off the Wall
"I am tryna explain Fed bailout to my boys. One-stop explanation? Links? Money that isn't money is a hard concept," Twittered music writer Sasha Frere-Jones early today. Okay, boys! Fasten your seatbelts.
So, you know how you like to buy songs on iTunes? There's so many different songs. Some of them are awesome, and some of them are lousy. And you only get a little audio preview of a song before you buy it, so really you dunno if it's any good before you buy it.
That is what a share in a company is like. You know it might be good? But really you don't know what's going on behind the scenes.
Now, imagine how great it would be if you could sell back your mp3s to iTunes! Like, you could buy a song when it was really unpopular, and it'd be like 29 cents. And then when it was really popular—like some Kanye jam was getting lots of radio play—it'd go way up to 99 cents. Then you could sell it, and you could keep the profit.
So that is basically the stock market, where they sell shares, except in the stock market, you're buying a little bit of a company, instead of on iTunes, where you're buying a little bit of a rapper or a band.
And just like the stock market, you're buying things you only know a little bit about, and hopefully you're buying them cheap—and in the stock market, like our imaginary perfect iTunes, you can sell your mp3s (your "shares") back, through iTunes, to all the other anonymous millions of people buying mp3s.
Now, what if you wanted to buy a LOT of mp3s? Like because you were about to have a party? Well, you'd have to sell a whole bunch of the mp3s you already have, to raise the money to buy more. Maybe you'd even sell them at a lower price than you bought them for, just to raise that money.
That would be lame!
But hey! You should totally borrow the money! (And keep all the mp3s you have.) So let's say there's a bunch of guys who went into business on iTunes. (Anytime there's money changing hands, someone will go into business.)
So these guys, they'll loan you money to buy mp3s! Because they're betting that some of the mp3s you buy, with the money you borrow from them, will totally get more expensive. When you borrow money, they charge you interest—so like, if you borrow 20 bucks from them to buy two albums, you'll have to pay them back maybe 22 bucks.
But that's okay, because you're a solid guy! You have lot of mp3s. They know you're good for those 2 bucks later, and you know that you have good taste in music, so of course your music will be more expensive when you're finally ready to sell it!
Okay, so, there's another kind of loan, called a mortgage. Say you wanted to buy a house? A house is expensive, like the complete works of Michael Jackson. There are 28 Michael Jackson albums on iTunes!
So you want to buy everything Michael Jackson ever made. Now, everyone figures that all mp3s get more expensive over time. Everyone always wants an mp3! So these guys who lend the money, they say: Yeah, you pay for like one or two of the Michael Jackson albums up front, and we'll give you all the rest of them too. But slowly, over time, you have to pay us for all the rest of the albums—plus, as long as you're paying us, you have to pay us that interest too.
So that is a mortgage.
But it's really awesome because you have all the Michael Jackson albums and you only paid for two. DANCE PARTY TIME.
Now these guys who loan money. They're like, we can help more and more people get Michael Jackson albums. That is how they make money—on that "interest" they get later.
Not everyone out in the wide world has such a big collection of mp3s. Not everyone is going to be able to pay back that extra 2 bucks in the case of a simple loan, or keep paying for all the Michael Jackson albums they didn't pay for yet.
At the same time, these guys who are loaning people money for mp3s are living pretty risky—they'll loan money to anyone. I mean, they'll loan money to people with like four stupid mp3s in their iTunes and no actual money at all!
And because they're loaning mp3 money to people they shouldn't, they start making the interest payments all crazy. They're all, "No, don't bother paying us any money at all for like a year! Then you can like, just pay us double the money you owe. But look—pay nothing for a year!"
And people are like oh yay! Except in a year, they're like, wait, DOUBLE?
Now you and I know this is a lousy deal. But who doesn't like free mp3s for a year?
So these people with no mp3s and no money aren't going to pay back their loans. No way, no how.
So those guys who loan money have to figure out how they're gonna keep making money, even when not everybody is gonna pay them back.
Get this. They go to other people who loan people money. And they sell them a share of the loans they have outstanding. The loaners get loans, based on the money they say they're gonna get down the road!
So you can see what might go wrong here, right? If a bunch of people don't pay back little loans, then, eh, it's sort of okay. Like, people can still keep buying and selling mp3s, because basically enough people are paying them back to keep the system running.
But what if a bunch of people don't ever pay? Particularly when that "first year free!" runs out, like, all these people hit a wall when actually they're spending like $18 on an album, instead of $9.99! Then the people who made the loans, and the people who went and loaned those people money, well they are in deep doo-doo.
Usually what happens in the real world is that, well, if you run out of money, you're out of business, right?
So like, if you loaned a bunch of people money, under the mistaken impression that Michael Jackson's back catalogue would always get more expensive, and then Michael Jackson got some weird face surgery again and no one wanted his albums any more, well then they won't get more expensive and all those loans are pretty worthless—and plus you loaned people money for mp3s who really didn't have the money to pay it back anyhow!
But don't forget—people are living in these particular mp3s. Like, if they can't pay back these loans, they won't have a place to live in anymore.
So then Apple wakes up and is all, HEY WHAT? And they are all like, this is such a bizarre crazy mess, how did this happen? But of course it happened right there on iTunes, and they should have been paying attention but they and everyone else were too busy spending money on some iPhones. (IPhones represent the war in Iraq, but don't worry about that. It's just really expensive.)
And then Apple is like, okay, in any normal situation, we will let all these lenders just go out of business and, well, tough for them. They were stupid, so forget them!
But because the people lose their mp3-homes if the lenders go out of business, Apple instead said, "Okay we will give a huge amount of money to keep the lenders in business so people can keep buying mp3s, though we'll control some of the ways people lend this money, so this doesn't stay so crazy."
But what nobody knows is: what will happen to the price of the mp3s? Will they get really expensive? The people at Apple (which is the government, by the way!) are gambling that mp3s will keep being fairly expensive. That's what helps the really rich people, the ones who own the most mp3s, keep getting richer.
And everyone everywhere was very surprised, because no one had any idea what would happen if suddenly everyone was off the hook for the very very silly and kind of stupid choices they had made, and no one knew if mp3s would get more or less expensive, but they were also pretty happy that people can at least continue to listen to Michael Jackson and most of them can still have a place to live.

http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2008/09/the-stock-market-and-the-bail-out-for-kids.php




 
The Stock Market And The Bailout For Kids



offthewall.jpg

WE ARE WAY OFF THE WALL NOW PEOPLE Michael Jackson's Off the Wall
"I am tryna explain Fed bailout to my boys. One-stop explanation? Links? Money that isn't money is a hard concept," Twittered music writer Sasha Frere-Jones early today. Okay, boys! Fasten your seatbelts.
So, you know how you like to buy songs on iTunes? There's so many different songs. Some of them are awesome, and some of them are lousy. And you only get a little audio preview of a song before you buy it, so really you dunno if it's any good before you buy it.
That is what a share in a company is like. You know it might be good? But really you don't know what's going on behind the scenes.
Now, imagine how great it would be if you could sell back your mp3s to iTunes! Like, you could buy a song when it was really unpopular, and it'd be like 29 cents. And then when it was really popular—like some Kanye jam was getting lots of radio play—it'd go way up to 99 cents. Then you could sell it, and you could keep the profit.
So that is basically the stock market, where they sell shares, except in the stock market, you're buying a little bit of a company, instead of on iTunes, where you're buying a little bit of a rapper or a band.
And just like the stock market, you're buying things you only know a little bit about, and hopefully you're buying them cheap—and in the stock market, like our imaginary perfect iTunes, you can sell your mp3s (your "shares") back, through iTunes, to all the other anonymous millions of people buying mp3s.
Now, what if you wanted to buy a LOT of mp3s? Like because you were about to have a party? Well, you'd have to sell a whole bunch of the mp3s you already have, to raise the money to buy more. Maybe you'd even sell them at a lower price than you bought them for, just to raise that money.
That would be lame!
But hey! You should totally borrow the money! (And keep all the mp3s you have.) So let's say there's a bunch of guys who went into business on iTunes. (Anytime there's money changing hands, someone will go into business.)
So these guys, they'll loan you money to buy mp3s! Because they're betting that some of the mp3s you buy, with the money you borrow from them, will totally get more expensive. When you borrow money, they charge you interest—so like, if you borrow 20 bucks from them to buy two albums, you'll have to pay them back maybe 22 bucks.
But that's okay, because you're a solid guy! You have lot of mp3s. They know you're good for those 2 bucks later, and you know that you have good taste in music, so of course your music will be more expensive when you're finally ready to sell it!
Okay, so, there's another kind of loan, called a mortgage. Say you wanted to buy a house? A house is expensive, like the complete works of Michael Jackson. There are 28 Michael Jackson albums on iTunes!
So you want to buy everything Michael Jackson ever made. Now, everyone figures that all mp3s get more expensive over time. Everyone always wants an mp3! So these guys who lend the money, they say: Yeah, you pay for like one or two of the Michael Jackson albums up front, and we'll give you all the rest of them too. But slowly, over time, you have to pay us for all the rest of the albums—plus, as long as you're paying us, you have to pay us that interest too.
So that is a mortgage.
But it's really awesome because you have all the Michael Jackson albums and you only paid for two. DANCE PARTY TIME.
Now these guys who loan money. They're like, we can help more and more people get Michael Jackson albums. That is how they make money—on that "interest" they get later.
Not everyone out in the wide world has such a big collection of mp3s. Not everyone is going to be able to pay back that extra 2 bucks in the case of a simple loan, or keep paying for all the Michael Jackson albums they didn't pay for yet.
At the same time, these guys who are loaning people money for mp3s are living pretty risky—they'll loan money to anyone. I mean, they'll loan money to people with like four stupid mp3s in their iTunes and no actual money at all!
And because they're loaning mp3 money to people they shouldn't, they start making the interest payments all crazy. They're all, "No, don't bother paying us any money at all for like a year! Then you can like, just pay us double the money you owe. But look—pay nothing for a year!"
And people are like oh yay! Except in a year, they're like, wait, DOUBLE?
Now you and I know this is a lousy deal. But who doesn't like free mp3s for a year?
So these people with no mp3s and no money aren't going to pay back their loans. No way, no how.
So those guys who loan money have to figure out how they're gonna keep making money, even when not everybody is gonna pay them back.
Get this. They go to other people who loan people money. And they sell them a share of the loans they have outstanding. The loaners get loans, based on the money they say they're gonna get down the road!
So you can see what might go wrong here, right? If a bunch of people don't pay back little loans, then, eh, it's sort of okay. Like, people can still keep buying and selling mp3s, because basically enough people are paying them back to keep the system running.
But what if a bunch of people don't ever pay? Particularly when that "first year free!" runs out, like, all these people hit a wall when actually they're spending like $18 on an album, instead of $9.99! Then the people who made the loans, and the people who went and loaned those people money, well they are in deep doo-doo.
Usually what happens in the real world is that, well, if you run out of money, you're out of business, right?
So like, if you loaned a bunch of people money, under the mistaken impression that Michael Jackson's back catalogue would always get more expensive, and then Michael Jackson got some weird face surgery again and no one wanted his albums any more, well then they won't get more expensive and all those loans are pretty worthless—and plus you loaned people money for mp3s who really didn't have the money to pay it back anyhow!
But don't forget—people are living in these particular mp3s. Like, if they can't pay back these loans, they won't have a place to live in anymore.
So then Apple wakes up and is all, HEY WHAT? And they are all like, this is such a bizarre crazy mess, how did this happen? But of course it happened right there on iTunes, and they should have been paying attention but they and everyone else were too busy spending money on some iPhones. (IPhones represent the war in Iraq, but don't worry about that. It's just really expensive.)
And then Apple is like, okay, in any normal situation, we will let all these lenders just go out of business and, well, tough for them. They were stupid, so forget them!
But because the people lose their mp3-homes if the lenders go out of business, Apple instead said, "Okay we will give a huge amount of money to keep the lenders in business so people can keep buying mp3s, though we'll control some of the ways people lend this money, so this doesn't stay so crazy."
But what nobody knows is: what will happen to the price of the mp3s? Will they get really expensive? The people at Apple (which is the government, by the way!) are gambling that mp3s will keep being fairly expensive. That's what helps the really rich people, the ones who own the most mp3s, keep getting richer.
And everyone everywhere was very surprised, because no one had any idea what would happen if suddenly everyone was off the hook for the very very silly and kind of stupid choices they had made, and no one knew if mp3s would get more or less expensive, but they were also pretty happy that people can at least continue to listen to Michael Jackson and most of them can still have a place to live.

http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2008/09/the-stock-market-and-the-bail-out-for-kids.php




This was cute, and informative and funny. I could imagine it, a dad teaching his kids about mortgages around the supper table...lol.
 
back catalogue would always get more expensive, and then Michael Jackson got some weird face surgery again and no one wanted his albums any more,

That shock story was an interesting read. I learned something from that article. I doubt that people would stop buying music of MJ based on his looks. It would be reasonable to say that if MJ did not produced most of the CD, than people would stop buying the CD. Now, that would be reasonable.
 
Back
Top